Dunkin v. State
This text of 706 So. 2d 942 (Dunkin v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Thomas DUNKIN, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
*943 James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Robert D. Rosen, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Dale E. Tarpley, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.
FRANK, Judge.
Thomas Dunkin has challenged the trial court's revocation of his probation on several grounds. We have reviewed the tortured procedural history of these revocation proceedings and have concluded that the trial court properly revoked Dunkin's probation for violation of conditions 1, 2 and 3. The written order, however, does not conform to the oral pronouncement. We remand this case for correction of the written order. See Narvaez v. State, 674 So.2d 868 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). Mr. Dunkin need not be present. See Boggs v. State, 557 So.2d 203 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990).
PARKER, C.J., and THREADGILL, J., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
706 So. 2d 942, 1998 WL 88235, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dunkin-v-state-fladistctapp-1998.